It's Craptastic!

This Machine Kills Fascists

Saturday, January 10, 2004

Out this week...

I'm afraid you'll have to live without my rants for a few days because I'm leaving for Las Vegas in the morning. I'll be back in time for the caucus. Feel free to rummage about but remember to turn off the lights and lock the door when you leave.

Saturday Dog Blog

Lying tricksie false

The Bush Administration began laying plans for an invasion of Iraq, including the use of American troops, within days of President Bush's inauguration in January of 2001 -- not eight months later after the 9/11 attacks as has been previously reported.

That's what former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill says in his first interview about his time as a White House insider. O'Neill talks to Correspondent Lesley Stahl in the interview, to be broadcast on 60 Minutes, Sunday, Jan. 11 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

"From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," he tells Stahl. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do is a really huge leap." ...Suskind says O'Neill and other White House insiders he interviewed gave him documents that show that in the first three months of 2001, the administration was looking at military options for removing Saddam Hussein from power and planning for the aftermath of Saddam's downfall -- including post-war contingencies like peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals and the future of Iraq's oil.

A Pentagon document, says Suskind, titled "Foreign Suitors For Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," outlines areas of oil exploration. "It talks about contractors around the world from...30, 40 countries and which ones have what intentions on oil in Iraq," Suskind says....In the book, O'Neill is quoted as saying he was surprised that no one in a National Security Council meeting questioned why Iraq should be invaded. "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this,'" says O'Neill in the book.

Suskind also writes about a White House meeting in which he says the president seems to be wavering about going forward with his second round of tax cuts. "Haven't we already given money to rich people ... Shouldn't we be giving money to the middle," Suskind says the president uttered, according to a nearly verbatim transcript of an Economic Team meeting he says he obtained from someone at the meeting.

I hope O'Neill is the first of many to tell the true stories of this White House. They cut taxes for the rich. They planned wars and then waited for an excuse to invade. They ruined the economy and trashed our international reputation. The Bill of Rights has been shredded. The environment is endangered. Who among us can honestly say that they are better off now than they were four years ago? Why would anyone making less than $1 million a year vote for this man? I cannot think of a single reason. He doesn't give a damn about you. Send the miserable failure back to Texas.

Keep eating your own...

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill likened President Bush at Cabinet meetings to "a blind man in a room full of deaf people," according to excerpts on Friday from a CBS interview.

O'Neill, who was fired by Bush in December 2002, also said the president did not ask him a single question during their first one-on-one meeting, which lasted an hour.

"As I recall it was just a monologue," he told CBS' "60 Minutes," which will broadcast the entire interview on Sunday.

In making the blind man analogy, O'Neill told CBS his ex-boss did not encourage a free flow of ideas or open debate.

"There is no discernible connection," CBS quoted O'Neill as saying. The president's lack of engagement left his advisers with "little more than hunches about what the president might think," O'Neill said, according to the program.

King George I, Emperor of the Moon

President Bush is planning a permanent science base for astronauts on the moon that could serve as a steppingstone for sending humans ultimately on to Mars, according to senior administration officials.

His colonialism knows no limits. Note to George: there's no oil on the moon. No WMDs either. No terrorists hiding in the Sea of Tranquility.

Thursday, January 08, 2004

Eating their own...

Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday brushed off the conservative authors of a new book on U.S. foreign policy who accused him of being a "soft-liner" by curtly saying "I don't do book reviews."

The critics, former Pentagon official Richard Perle and former White House speech writer David Frum, wrote an opinion piece on Wednesday in which they suggested Powell was among a group of Bush administration officials who believe the way to defeat "terrorism" was through diplomacy and the United Nations.

Richard Perle, the Imperial Grand Dragon of the Chickenhawk Empire, will not be satisfied until we are at war with every country on the planet. He is no longer the chairman of Pentagon's defense Policy Review Board but he remains on the board. His chief minion Grima Wormtongue, I mean Paul Wolfowitz, is the Deputy Secretary of Defense. These two have been calling for an invasion of Iraq since 1998 and wrote the instruction manual in 2000. These two documents should be Exhibit A & B at Perle's war crimes tribunal.

Read this book...

I'm currently reading James Carville's Had Enough? and I cannot put it down. Anyone with a remote interest in politics should read this book. Any Democrat running for office must read this book. It is an instruction manual for victory in 2004.

Bush Lied. Thousands Died...

The Washington Post concludes that Iraqs WMDs were destroyed after the first Gulf War. I believe Bush pulled the U.S. out of the International Criminal Court in May of 2002 because an illegal invasion of Iraq was already in the works.

For my fellow Iowans...

This question has shown up on our discussion boards several times: "Can I go to the caucuses to support Wesley Clark?" Several media sources have incorrectly stated that Clark is "not participating in the caucuses". In truth, the Clark campaign has chosen not to campaign actively in Iowa, which means not spending money on appearances, television advertising, etc.

One of our supporters (Joyce Carman) expressed this frustration in a discussion board posting:I'm convinced there are many, many caucus goers in our communities who would like to know that they CAN caucus for Clark. We just have to keep working at getting that word out. Clark was on Talk of the Nation last week. He was delayed getting to the interview, so Neal Conan (moderator) was filling in with information and he kept saying over and over, "Clark isn't participating in the Iowa caucuses". I kept phoning and phoning and sent an email---asking him to correct the statement to "Clark isn't CAMPAIGNING in Iowa, but caucus goers there CAN caucus for Clark". Unfortunately, he didn't get my message or, at least, did not correct the statement. Possibly many of you did the same thing I did. We have to keep working at getting this message out. Thanks, everyone across the state, for the great work you are doing. --Joyce

Clark's name will be leading the ballot at the Iowa Caucuses ("C" is first in alphabetical order), so be sure to show your support.

The members of the Church of Dean don't want you to know this. A strong showing for Clark in Iowa would would be a great springboard for New Hampshire and beyond.